• Please read this post on the rules on BigFooty regarding posting copyright material, including fair dealing rules. Repeat infringements could see your account limited or closed.

Did ASADA use Sandor Earl to fabricate evidence?

Remove this Banner Ad

White Kings said:
We will agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

No I will continue to think you a conspiracist who is only interested in their own views. For me to disagree I would first have to consider your position valid and that I do not.

I have often disagreed with someone like sameolds33 or lance here, you I just disbelieve.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Muggs said:
No I will continue to think you a conspiracist who is only interested in their own views. For me to disagree I would first have to consider your position valid and that I do not.

I have often disagreed with someone like sameolds33 or lance here, you I just disbelieve.
Click to expand...

I thought it was obvious that you were not going to entertain anything other than your own opinion on what happened, so decided it was a polite way of abbreviating the back and forth on the substantial assistance.
 
Lance Uppercut said:
started reading, got to about page 8 and the first:

"My comment:"

Concluded that, yes, I am actually reading yet another lengthy join the dots tome by Bruce ******* Francis, and shut down the web page. Got better things to do
Click to expand...
As soon as I read it was from twit-long and 33 pages long, I knew it was from Bruce. You're slipping Lance. :p
 
jenny61_99 said:
As soon as I read it was from twit-long and 33 pages long, I knew it was from Bruce. You're slipping Lance. :p
Click to expand...

Don't think it's from Bruce... No abusing or swearing about ASADA and its personal, also no "my comments". if it was from Bruce it be from the governors Twitter account as well.

Reminds me more of the guy who wrote a response to Chris Kaias piece on the CAS verdict.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Muggs said:
How can something like that be written and not look like it came from some looney?

Probably why they not putting their name to it.
Click to expand...

Any other specific holes that you could ascertain Muggs, or are you content using broad, sweeping statements such as "plenty of reasons", and "it's not inconceivable"?

Just wondering.
 
White Kings said:
Any other specific holes that you could ascertain Muggs, or are you content using broad, sweeping statements such as "plenty of reasons", and "it's not inconceivable"?

Just wondering.
Click to expand...

Let me summarise my arguments to date and point out a few other ones.

Highlighted that there is an alternate argument for how Dank could meet Sedrak in that date range, with Sedrak still providing peptides to Cronulla via Hibbard, and how Dank personally sourced peptides from someone else prior to this that does not mean evidence tampering that fits with public information

The alternate explanations for substantial assistance and how else one year could be arrived at without resorting to fabricating evidence (such as substantial assistance alone!) so why bother? That even if true it be 50% of the use of TB4 charge a two year charge not 4 trafficking year charge, and that could also argue that as he was already accused the clause you cited could not even be applied anyway. . To this will also add after watching the Locker Room You tube video dated Feb 11 where Earl is quoted in regards to substantial assistance being offered is also the same YouTube video where he talks about why he knocked back ASADA on substantial assistance, yet this is never quoted... Why would Earl try to collude with ASADA to get a discount he did not want?

Also if you going to offer a 50% discount from a use charge and apply this to a trafficking charge the same thing could then be arrived at by him admitting guilt on the CJC-1295 use charge and get the no significant fault/negligence discount like the rest of the NRL players who took a deal. Admitting guilt is a requirement of no significant fault. Even Earl pointed out that this was a new process to ASADA (as quoted in that opinion piece) so the whole thing could have unraveled simply by ASADA trying to offer things they couldn't due to their inexperience (remember all ASADA investigators where brand new to ASADA at this point as well) so multiple alternate arguments on how to get 4 years down to 1 that do not require trumped up charges.

The fact that ASADA was prepared to prove the text messages you say were made up and these messages were than accepted as fact by the defence and not challenged. If you argument, which basically boils that they couldn't be bothered, is true hope the players sues their defence team for negligence, you don't NOT try to knock out what could be key evidence if you the defence team.

I also pointed out the insinuation that if Earl and ASADA are hiding something by not releasing his tribunal findings, also applies to the 32 EFC players who declined to have the AFL tribunal findings released. So what are these EFC players trying to hide?

The fundamental so called fact of that opinion piece was that he was found not guilty by the NRL of TB4 charges is wrong as the evidence was never tested. Again I refer to the fact as these were concurrent rather than subsequent charges would not have affected the penalty so were rather pointless once Earl had a number of other charges dropped.

That there is no author attached to the piece thus protecting who ever wrote it from defamation from Holmes and Earl that would surely follow if this made it way to main stream media, one could suggest this is because the author knows this could not be proven to even the lower standard of proof used in a civil defamation case, let alone to the criminal standard that would be needed if were true.

So my pointing this all out is not enough?

Edit* should also add that most of this allegation that ASADA and Earl is to establish a single strand that Dank had a pattern of use in using TB4 and actually had little or no relation the EFC34 or the other evidence used against the EFC and this one strand on pattern of use is the key pivotal strand, which by the very nature of a strand in the cable argument no one strand is key!
 
Last edited:
I thought I said any "other" specific holes. The double shoulder reco, ASADA's charges in August, Dr Khan's defense papers, Sandor's admission about transporting CJC to Khan, his inconsistent version of events. But I see you went back to the well on certain sections you feel are lacking.

First of all, I'm not giving credit to ASADA being "prepared" to prove text messages as factual. And how can you? The defense did not accept them as fact, The Chairman would not accept the delay for the required process, an agreement was reached before proceeding. Why would David Grace question their validity, and when told no verification had been performed by ASADA, then just accept them as fact? That didn't happen.

Personally, I think you have the understanding of the WADA code in relation to Earl way off. You put forward reasons for discounting and they are all wrong. Please don't make me explain. I would say read the code carefully, but I would not subject you to that.

Earl says on the Locker Room, and on the NRL Footy Show, he would not comment on hearsay from Stephen Dank about other players. I would specify that as other "rugby" players. If you have read the transcripts from the AFL Tribunal, he talks about Dank and Essendon and alleged substances and regimes. His public " I didn't tell ASADA about hearsay from Stephen Dank which would have given me a discount" routine. Wow. ASADA denied his substantial assistance by the way, he didn't knock it back. He did not give up his mate Martin Kennedy.

What are the Essendon players hiding by not releasing their findings? 1297 pages of Tribunal transcripts are online, all the alleged dirt ASADA has in plain sight. Please tell me what findings will tell you that the transcripts don't. No such transcripts are available for Earl now are they? Except for the AATA findings which point to Earl transporting CJC to Khan in August, not in September like his rubbish version of the story.

One point about ASADA not pursuing TB4 at the NRL Tribunal, why bother charging him with trafficking 5 different substances, when charging him with 1 would have achieved the same outcome? Saying they had better proof to prosecute CJC than TB4, so let it slide is not consistent with the trafficking. This does not dispute the documents argument very well. The redactions from Earl's AATA findings regarding his TB4 charges, man I would love to see those.

I don't think the document is meant to "prove" anything, and it can't. It's only using the information available. The only conclusion would be found after a review of ASADA's investigation, and that will never happen.
 
Last edited:
Muggs said:
Edit* should also add that most of this allegation that ASADA and Earl is to establish a single strand that Dank had a pattern of use in using TB4 and actually had little or no relation the EFC34 or the other evidence used against the EFC and this one strand on pattern of use is the key pivotal strand, which by the very nature of a strand in the cable argument no one strand is key!
Click to expand...

Without Earl, and Dank's August 2 and 23 texts, you have no history of use, no professed intent, no opinions on how important Dank considers TB4, no described function of muscle repair, no implied reference when just "Thymosin" is used. C'mon man, all that is explained. It's needed because of the conflicting evidence regarding immune boosting.
 
White Kings said:
Personally, I think you have the understanding of the WADA code in relation to Earl way off. You put forward reasons for discounting and they are all wrong. Please don't make me explain. I would say read the code carefully, but I would not subject you to that.
Click to expand...

Ok I'm going to take you word for it and trust your reading of the code.

Hey everyone pay attention, White Kings here has given me a fantastic idea for a PED business.

According to him atheletes can get a discount if they caught taking or trafficking a PED by admitting to taking a second PED that the anti- doping agency does not know about. (10.5.4 WADA code).

So our competive advantage will be every time we sell a PED like a steroid we going to supply a second banned substance that there is no test for. That way if the athelte gets caught on the PED they can than admit to the second substance we supply and get a spontaneous admission discount on the second substance like ASADA colluded with Sandor Earl on.

I'm thinking maybe a failed drug, something that never got approved because it was useless, but since never approved banned under S0. Useless and not approved should also mean WADA won't worry about wasting money on developing a test. Ancient Tiger got any contacts within the pharmacy industry that can help us out?

I had a read through the WADA case law on this clause (nice summary here http://www.onepaper.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/N13_Anti_Doping.pdf) but seems the existing tests around establishing spontaneous admission discounts (or a early guilty plea) is on admitting to the first substance caught on (or about to be caught on I should say) not the second. Could not find any cases where it was given on admitting to second substance (and you HTB regulars know how many awards I have read, White Kings here seems to be under the impression I don't (or can't) read...).

Seems no one else has caught onto the fact that you can get a discount by admitting to a second substance, one of these glaringly obvious loop holes once pointed out to you, but so basic it's been completely overlooked since introduced in 2009. Figure it probably be corrected in the next WADA code update (once WADA realises what we doing) but we should make a killing in the next four years or so before than. I'm really surpised no ones tried this so we want to get in fast before more people realise this is possible.

Anyone got contact details for Sandor Earl? getting a copy of the proposed deal or at least a statement from him about the deal be great for marketing.

I get a prospectus and business plan drawn up, if anyone wants to invest in the business let me know and I send you a copy when ready.

White Kings if you PM me the authors name I cut him in for nothing, after all it was his article that triggered the idea. I promise not to tell anyone.

Just think we can promise a 50% discount on penalties to any of our clients who get caught taking a PED just by admitting to taking more banned substances! We going to make a killing I tell you!

Any suggestions for what we should call the business? blackcat evo you normally good at this kind of thing.
 
Last edited:
Muggs said:
Ok I'm going to take you word for it and trust your reading of the code.

Hey everyone pay attention, White Kings here has given me a fantastic idea for a PED business.

According to him atheletes can get a discount if they caught taking or trafficking a PED by admitting to taking a second PED that the anti- doping agency does not know about. (10.5.4 WADA code).

So our competive advantage will be every time we sell a PED like a steroid we going to supply a second banned substance that there is no test for. That way if the athelte gets caught on the PED they can than admit to the second substance we supply and get a spontaneous admission discount on the second substance like ASADA colluded with Sandor Earl on.

I'm thinking maybe a failed drug, something that never got approved because it was useless, but since never approved banned under S0. Useless and not approved should also mean WADA won't worry about wasting money on developing a test. Ancient Tiger got any contacts within the pharmacy industry that can help us out?

I had a read through the WADA case law on this clause (nice summary here http://www.onepaper.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/N13_Anti_Doping.pdf) but seems the existing tests around establishing spontaneous admission discounts (or a early guilty plea) is on admitting to the first substance caught on (or about to be caught on I should say) not the second. Could not find any cases where it was given on admitting to second substance (and you HTB regulars know how many awards I have read, White Kings here seems to be under the impression I don't (or can't) read...).

Seems no one else has caught onto the fact that you can get a discount by admitting to a second substance, one of these glaringly obvious loop holes once pointed out to you, but so basic it's been completely overlooked since introduced in 2009. Figure it probably be corrected in the next WADA code update (once WADA realises what we doing) but we should make a killing in the next four years or so before than. I'm really surpised no ones tried this so we want to get in fast before more people realise this is possible.

Anyone got contact details for Sandor Earl? getting a copy of the proposed deal or at least a statement from him about the deal be great for marketing.

I get a prospectus and business plan drawn up, if anyone wants to invest in the business let me know and I send you a copy when ready.

White Kings if you PM me the authors name I cut him in for nothing, after all it was his article that triggered the idea. I promise not to tell anyone.

Just think we can promise a 50% discount on penalties to any of our clients who get caught taking a PED just by admitting to taking more banned substances! We going to make a killing I tell you!

Any suggestions for what we should call the business? blackcat evo you normally good at this kind of thing.
Click to expand...
I think we'll have to honour the two brains behing the undertaking ....

Muggs' Drugs Emporium - "We give you White Wings!"

I couldn't get king in there anywhere, sorry. So it sort of a hidden nod to WK.
Hopefully the tag line's similarity to another sporting related brand will get us plenty of exposure for the 4 year sprint!
 
[QUOTE="Muggs, post: 45284198, member: 159449" Ok I'm going to take you word for it and trust your reading of the code.

Hey everyone pay attention, White Kings here has given me a fantastic idea for a PED business.

According to him atheletes can get a discount if they caught taking or trafficking a PED by admitting to taking a second PED that the anti- doping agency does not know about. (10.5.4 WADA code).

So our competive advantage will be every time we sell a PED like a steroid we going to supply a second banned substance that there is no test for. That way if the athelte gets caught on the PED they can than admit to the second substance we supply and get a spontaneous admission discount on the second substance like ASADA colluded with Sandor Earl on.

I'm thinking maybe a failed drug, something that never got approved because it was useless, but since never approved banned under S0. Useless and not approved should also mean WADA won't worry about wasting money on developing a test. Ancient Tiger got any contacts within the pharmacy industry that can help us out?

I had a read through the WADA case law on this clause (nice summary here http://www.onepaper.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/N13_Anti_Doping.pdf) but seems the existing tests around establishing spontaneous admission discounts (or a early guilty plea) is on admitting to the first substance caught on (or about to be caught on I should say) not the second. Could not find any cases where it was given on admitting to second substance (and you HTB regulars know how many awards I have read, White Kings here seems to be under the impression I don't (or can't) read...).

Seems no one else has caught onto the fact that you can get a discount by admitting to a second substance, one of these glaringly obvious loop holes once pointed out to you, but so basic it's been completely overlooked since introduced in 2009. Figure it probably be corrected in the next WADA code update (once WADA realises what we doing) but we should make a killing in the next four years or so before than. I'm really surpised no ones tried this so we want to get in fast before more people realise this is possible.

Anyone got contact details for Sandor Earl? getting a copy of the proposed deal or at least a statement from him about the deal be great for marketing.

I get a prospectus and business plan drawn up, if anyone wants to invest in the business let me know and I send you a copy when ready.

White Kings if you PM me the authors name I cut him in for nothing, after all it was his article that triggered the idea. I promise not to tell anyone.

Just think we can promise a 50% discount on penalties to any of our clients who get caught taking a PED just by admitting to taking more banned substances! We going to make a killing I tell you!

Any suggestions for what we should call the business? blackcat evo you normally good at this kind of thing.[ /QUOTE]​

stuffed w the quote code, so could include all of Muggs post, cos it was worthy.

good post Muggs.

doping bizness is the jizz bomb.

i) we needed nicknames.

already gone is
1) The Weapon, OR just weapon; 2) the professor; 3) the pharmacist; 4) the gazelle; 5) Shumi; 6) Dr Ageless; 7) Healing Hans

I like something like... The Colonel. then the ambiguity is, if you mean, the dirty bird, or steve austin and the 6 million dollar man.

So we need to get the first step right.

ii) dont hire mugs like trent croad Muggs.
iii) but do use a dual distribution model, like horseracing and Peter Moody Racing... moody will be looking for another black caviar on his return, so he will require a good preparatore with a good suplly channel.

iv) supply chain and risk management. Remember, customs have been intercepting the PEDs which tipped off the Feds, and in come Ausada over the top, who had no business in the criminal element. Need to look at it with the lens like organised crime, you cant have too many folks listening in, like my post on the FigBooty. It is like you are bringing in a hungy mill of meth, and how you get it here without the feds intercepting or putting a dummy shipment in its place...

Dont have idjits like wowoeding thank you on the brownlow stage for your assistance in his preparation... the hubris of jacked athletes, remember, you will be dealing with idjits...

start with finding the nickname, then get back to me, and then go to Phillip Ormonde Fitzpatrick the chief intellectual property patent and copyright firm in Oz, and get them to register your nom de plume as preparatore alliterationz

then get back to me Muggs
 
NoAFLinmycomp said:
I think we'll have to honour the two brains behing the undertaking ....

Muggs' Drugs Emporium - "We give you White Wings!"

I couldn't get king in there anywhere, sorry. So it sort of a hidden nod to WK.
Hopefully the tag line's similarity to another sporting related brand will get us plenty of exposure for the 4 year sprint!
Click to expand...
White Castle.

Like the 20 dollar hamburger in 1988 on Acland street that evo was scoffing by the mouthful
FAQ1VPEFN82U7A5.MEDIUM.jpg
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Did ASADA use Sandor Earl to fabricate evidence?

Similar threads

The_Wookie
Play Nice Happy 10th Anniversary (of the Essendon/ASADA Saga)
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
blackcat
blackcat
Satan
Pharmacist involved in essendon saga sadly found dead
Replies
3
Views
885
Satan
Satan
A
This is the way to treat drug cheats
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
PoppedCorn
PoppedCorn

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top